Medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty combined to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively evaluate the outcomes of patients who underwent combined medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The hypothesis was that this procedure would lead to a high success rate in patients affected by isolated medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis and concomitant ACL deficiency. METHODS: Fourteen patients with primary ACL lesion and concomitant medial compartment symptomatic osteoarthritis treated from 2006 to 2010 were followed up for an average time of 26.7 months (SD 4.2). Assessment included KOOS score, Oxford Knee score, American Knee Society scores, WOMAC index of osteoarthritis, Tegner activity level and objective examination including instrumented laxity test with KT-1000 arthrometer. Radiological assessment was done with standard simple radiographs in order to get information about any presence of loosening of the components. RESULTS: KOOS score, OKS, WOMAC index and the AKSS improved significantly after surgery (p < 0.001). Regarding AKSS, improvement was noted both in the objective score and in the functional one (p < 0.001). There was no clinical evidence of instability in any of the knees as evaluated with clinical laxity testing. No pathologic radiolucent lines were observed around the components. In one patient signs of osteoarthritis in the lateral compartment were observed 28 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: UKA combined with ACL reconstruction is a valid therapeutic option for the treatment of combined medial unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis and ACL deficiency in young and active patients and confirms subjective and objective clinical improvement 2 years after surgery. The use of a fixed-bearing prosthesis represents a reliable feature as it allows to overcome problems of improper ligament tensioning during the implantation of the components. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".